IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA

th

ON THE 17 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 SECOND APPEAL No. 493 of 2024 SANTOSH JAIN Versus SUBHASHCHANDRA GOYAL AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Dharmendra Dwivedi - Advocate for appellant.

Mr. Yogesh Chaturvedi - Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

JUDGMENT This second appeal under Section 100 of CPC has been filed against judgment and decree dated 22/11/2023 passed by Fourth District Judge, Guna in R.C.A. No. 110/2019, as well as judgment and decree dated 31/08/2019 passed by First Civil Judge Class-II, Guna in R.C.S.A. No.

170023/2013.

2. Appellant is the plaintiff who has lost his case from both the Courts below.

3. The facts necessary for disposal of present appeal, in short, are that appellant filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction, as well as for possession, by pleading inter alia that Chhoga Lal Jain was the grandfather of plaintiff. Chhoga Lal Jain had three sons, namely Nannu Lal Jain, Gattu Lal Jain and Mishri Lal Jain. Although Nannu Lal Jain was married but he was not blessed with any child and he was residing in Talaiya Mohalla near Chandsi Gali. Nannu Lal Jain had executed a Will in favor of plaintiff in respect of his property situated in Talaiya Mohalla. Gattu Lal Jain in pursuance of the decree passed by the Court had purchased the disputed property by a sale deed dated 04/05/1995 for a consideration amount of Rs. 13,250/-. Gattu Lal Jain was issueless, and therefore, Gattu Lal Jain and his wife Gulab Bai had love and affection towards the plaintiff. Mother of plaintiff had expired when he was 25 years of age, and accordingly, plaintiff had started residing permanently with Gattu Lal Jain and his wife Gulab Bai. Father of defendants, namely late Mintu Lal Goyal, was in possession of two rooms situated on the second floor of the house of Gattu Lal Jain in the capacity of tenant, and thereafter, one shop admeasuring 5 feet x 12 feet was also let out to Mintu Lal Jain on rent. In 1987, Gattu Lal Jain got another shop opened for the plaintiff, and in fact, plaintiff was purchasing the material for both the shops, and he was also looking after the shop of Gattu Lal Jain. At the time of death of Gattu Lal Jain, Mintu Lal was making payment of monthly rent of Rs. 500/- for two rooms and Rs. 250/- for the shop. In the remaining part of building, Gattu Lal Jain was running a business of cloth. In the year 1993, shop of plaintiff, which was situated in Hanuman Gali, got burned, and thereafter, plaintiff started sitting in the shop of Gattu Lal Jain. On 30/01/1995, Gattu Lal Jain expired, and thereafter, father of defendants started making payment of rent of Rs. 750/- to the father of plaintiff. Thereafter, in order to look after his father, plaintiff was required to close down the business of cloth, and accordingly, Mintu Lal took the shop, in which the business of Gattu Lal Jain was going on, on rent and after removing the partition of tin shed enhanced the size of the shop, and accordingly, started making payment of monthly rent at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month to the father of plaintiff. Father of plaintiff died on 14/01/1997, and thereafter, father of defendants, namely Mintu Lal, started making payment of rent to the plaintiff. Plaintiff had also got married in the disputed house, and after the marriage, even the wife of plaintiff started residing with Gulab Bai. On 11/03/1999, Gulab Bai also expired and the last rites were performed by appellant, and after the death of Gulab Bai, appellant continued to reside in the part of house which has been shown in green color, whereas wife of plaintiff was most of the time residing in her parental home situated in Khurai. After the wife of plaintiff recovered from physical ailment and daughter of plaintiff started going to school, then for the purposes of education of his daughter, plaintiff shifted to Chaudhran Colony near Christ School, Guna. In the year 2001, plaintiff req